The saffron party MP Alok Sharma’s anti-Muslim diatribe in Bhopal highlights persistent threat to social harmony and constitutional values
NEW DELHI/BHOPAL — The recent anti-Muslim diatribe by BJP MP Alok Sharma against Muslims has once again thrust the issue of hate speech into the national spotlight. Despite clear Supreme Court orders aimed at curbing inflammatory remarks, several BJP leaders have repeatedly made virulent statements targeting the country’s Muslim community, causing serious damage to social harmony. The scale and frequency of such remarks are alarming.
Speaking on the matter, Alok Sharma said, “We are raising concerns about Muslim influence in our communities,” prompting widespread fear and anger among local Muslims. Community leaders expressed shock at the brazenness of the remarks.
Alok Sharma is merely one member of a long list of BJP politicians who have made similar remarks over the years. Prime Minister Narendra Modi, in his April 2024 election rallies, referred to Muslims as “intruders” and claimed “they have too many children,” statements that were widely criticised for inflaming communal sentiment.
Former BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma and media head Naveen Kumar Jindal faced backlash for making disrespectful comments about the Prophet Muhammad, which were followed by incidents of violence and damage to properties in several states.
Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath has also targeted Muslims with labels like “Tablighi” or “jihadi.” Former Union Minister Anurag Thakur, in 2020, issued a slogan advocating violence against unnamed communities. Other BJP leaders, including T Raja Singh, Ramesh Bidhuri, Hemant Biswa Sarma, Mithun Chakraborty, and Pushpendra Kulshrestha, have used derogatory terms such as “second-class citizens” or “mad jihadis” against Muslims.
Data from India Hate Lab indicates that hate speech incidents in 2024 did not decrease by 74% as expected, but instead rose sharply from 668 to 1,165 incidents, with 98.5% of them targeting Muslims. Eighty percent of these cases occurred in BJP-ruled states like Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra, and Madhya Pradesh. BJP itself organised 340 hate speech events, ranking highest among political parties.
Recognising the growing threat of hate speech and communal tensions, the Supreme Court has issued several landmark orders over recent years to maintain social harmony while respecting Article 19(2) of the Constitution.
In Tahseen Poonawala v. Bharat Sangh (21 October 2023) case, the court mandated immediate legal action against hate speech, stating, “Whether statements are made on social media, public gatherings, or any platform, there must be no delay in action.” Police were instructed to file FIRs within 24 hours, increase social media monitoring, remove inflammatory content promptly, and ensure district authorities regularly supervise sensitive areas.
Earlier, in Amandeep Singh Sahota v. Government of India (12 July 2021) case, the court warned that hate speech harms the nation’s social fabric and directed the creation of a National Monitoring System. State governments were instructed to submit regular reports on action taken, and trials were to be expedited to send a clear societal message.
Despite these clear directives, states including Haryana, Karnataka, Uttar Pradesh, and Madhya Pradesh have continued to witness hate speech incidents and communal boycotts. This indicates that some state authorities are not implementing Supreme Court guidelines seriously.
By August 2025, notices had been issued to several states due to increasing complaints of hate speech. The Supreme Court now emphasises rapid action and administrative accountability to preserve social harmony and uphold constitutional respect. The cases of BJP MP Alok Sharma and earlier incidents, such as threats against Army officer Sophia Qureshi, highlight ongoing challenges, particularly in BJP-governed regions.
Muslim leaders and activists have expressed deep concern. Maulana Imran Farooqui, a prominent community spokesperson, stated: “These repeated attacks show a blatant disregard for law and humanity.”
Law experts underline the urgency of enforcement. Advocate Sameer Khan remarked, “Supreme Court orders are not advisory—they are binding. Failure to act perpetuates a culture of fear and communal hostility.”
The continuing pattern of anti-Muslim remarks from powerful political figures demonstrates a pressing need for accountability and stronger mechanisms to protect vulnerable communities. With social cohesion at stake, public pressure and legal vigilance remain critical to ensure India’s constitutional guarantees are respected.
